Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18
I have never been more wrong about a player than I was about Chris Tanev.
Thought he was too injury prone, and too old to be an impact player again like he was early in his career.
I was 100% wrong.
|
I wasn't a fan of the term of the contract not because he was considered a bad player and more that he was an injury prone player that statistically appeared to be on the decline. His advanced stats I believe did not look great in his last season in Vancouver but that was likely due to having to cover for Hughes who's a mess in his own end. His previous career high for games played was 70 games and miraculously he went two seasons (one was abbreviated) injury free for the team. Looks like a case of a change of scenery benefitting the player in his later years.